What do you think?
Rate this book
The World on the Last Day: The Sack of Constantinople by the Turks, May 29th 1453, Its Causes and Consequences
304 pages, Hardcover
First published May 1, 1965
8 people want to read
About the author
David Stacton
53 books10 followersAka Bud Clifton
David Derek Stacton (1925–1968) was a U.S. novelist, historian and poet. He was born on 25 April 1925 in Minden, Nevada. Stacton attended Stanford University from 1941–43, and graduated from the University of California, Berkeley in 1951. He served in the Civilian Public Service as a conscientious objector then lived in Europe from 1950–1954, 1960–1962, and 1964–1965. Stacton wrote under the pseudonyms Carse Boyd, Bud Clifton, David Dereksen and David West. Most of his books were originally published in England. He died of a stroke 19 January 1968 in Fredensborg, Denmark.
Stacton's novels are often low in dialogue, and his better novels are instead full of his witty scornful comments on his characters and life. At his best Stacton had an epigrammatic style and enjoyed a sophisticated irony, although antipathetic critics took him to task for pretentious vocabulary, a tendency to florid paradoxes, and anachronistic allusions (i.e. describing a 14th century Zen garden using phrases from Marianne Moore and Peter Pan). In 1963, Time magazine praised his work as "masses of epigrams marinated in a stinging mixture of metaphysics and blood" and suggested that "something similar might have been the result if the Duc de la Rochefoucauld had written novels with plots suggested by Jack London". His other literary influences include Walter Pater, for his choice of characters with frustrated artistic and emotional longings, and Lytton Strachey for his witty attention to history. Several of Stacton's novels feature homosexual characters prominently. Fans of David Stacton include John Crowley, Thomas M. Disch, and Peter Beagle.
David Derek Stacton (1925–1968) was a U.S. novelist, historian and poet. He was born on 25 April 1925 in Minden, Nevada. Stacton attended Stanford University from 1941–43, and graduated from the University of California, Berkeley in 1951. He served in the Civilian Public Service as a conscientious objector then lived in Europe from 1950–1954, 1960–1962, and 1964–1965. Stacton wrote under the pseudonyms Carse Boyd, Bud Clifton, David Dereksen and David West. Most of his books were originally published in England. He died of a stroke 19 January 1968 in Fredensborg, Denmark.
Stacton's novels are often low in dialogue, and his better novels are instead full of his witty scornful comments on his characters and life. At his best Stacton had an epigrammatic style and enjoyed a sophisticated irony, although antipathetic critics took him to task for pretentious vocabulary, a tendency to florid paradoxes, and anachronistic allusions (i.e. describing a 14th century Zen garden using phrases from Marianne Moore and Peter Pan). In 1963, Time magazine praised his work as "masses of epigrams marinated in a stinging mixture of metaphysics and blood" and suggested that "something similar might have been the result if the Duc de la Rochefoucauld had written novels with plots suggested by Jack London". His other literary influences include Walter Pater, for his choice of characters with frustrated artistic and emotional longings, and Lytton Strachey for his witty attention to history. Several of Stacton's novels feature homosexual characters prominently. Fans of David Stacton include John Crowley, Thomas M. Disch, and Peter Beagle.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 of 1 review
August 6, 2025
[Although parts of this review were posted previously this is the completed review. I am sorry it has taken so long. I hope it was worth waiting for.]
"In 1453, after more than a thousand years as an empire, Byzantium fell to the Turks. Her once vast territories gone, internally torn by religious and political strife, she was queen of the eastern Roman empire in name only. Although the final battle was fought between unequal forces, the one fanatic and professional, the other fearful and poorly armed, it was also a clash between two of history's strongest personalities: Mahomet II and Constantine XI. The triumph was inevitably Mahomet's, and the tragedy was Constantine's, who, betrayed in the palaces of Europe and in the streets of his own city, stood almost alone against the Turks. Constantine's first successes and ultimate failure produce a striking portrait of men and civilisations in conflict.
"David Stacton is the author of a number of highly praised historical novels--among them 'Remember Me', about the mad King Ludwig II, 'Segaki' set in medieval Japan, and 'On a Balcony', a reconstruction of the reigh and personality of the Pharoah Akhnaton. 'The World on the Last Day' is his first non fiction book. In it he exploits to the full his ability to construct a coherent and gripping narrative from the most complicated facts; and to explore with intelligence, sympathy and conviction, situations and personalities which, at first glance, seem very unfamiliar.' From the flyleaf on the jacket of the UK 1965 edition from Faber & Faber.
I read the story of the fall of Constantinople in 1453 for the first time when I was eleven or twelve years old and was captivated by its poetic mythos. The St. Elmos fire shooting up from the dome of Hagia Sophia into the sky as portent of the abandonment of the city by its christian protecting spirits echoed Dionysus abandoning Anthony in Alexandria and while the decision by Constantine XI, the last emperor, when the walls of Constantinople had breached to doff his regalia and go down and die fighting rather then flee brought to mind Priam of Troy dying, sword in hand, with his city. Napoleon on St. Helena or the male descendents of Mohamet II shuffling off into exile in 1924 might well have wondered if they had failed to seize the opportunity to live up to, or step into, legend like Constantine XI did.
'The World on the Last Day' by David Stacton lives up to the poetic grandeur of the event but is also a superb narrative history which displays the author's mastery of the rich contemporary chronicles and survivors accounts. Stacton's came out in the same year as 'The Fall of Constantinople, 1453' by Steven Runciman, the great English historian of Byzantium, and was considered as equally worthy of praise as Runciman's (see: https://www.cambridge.org/core/journa..., and my footnote *1 below).
Stacton charmingly and honestly admits that does not read the Greek, Serbo-Croat, Polish or Russian that most important sources are written and '...even my Latin is on a lapidary level (and) I have had to consult most of them quoted in secondary sources or in translation, or with a crib...' (if only more non-academic historians would be so up-front) yet his account of Constantinople's demise is the equal of Runciman's and in many ways better because Stacton, although immersed in the drama of the events of 1453, is free of Runciman's very obvious pro-Byzantine bias. Such overt bias was, and in many cases still is, the default position of historians of the Eastern Greek Empire (the empire was never called 'Byzantine' in its lifetime. It was Gibbon in the 18th century in his 'Decline and Fall of The Roman Empire' who popularised the term 'Byzantine Empire') because for so long 'Byzantine' studies were viewed as a cul de sac of historical study and its practitioners were regarded as bizarre eccentrics (see footnote *2 Below). For my part I sympathize with Stacton's annoyance with the behavior of the population of Constantinople (almost the only part of the 'empire' still under the 'emperor's' control though often it was vestigial control) who frequently hindered and disrupted Constantine XI efforts to stave off conquest by the Ottomans.
Stacton recognises that there never was a chance of 'saving', only 'postponing', Constantinople's demise and condemns the limited support and help the pope and Latin kingdoms offered, always with strings attached, but rarely delivered. He is as fervent as Runciman in denouncing the role of the Latin 'crusaders' in undermining the Eastern empire, most notably the sack of Constantinople in 1204, but he isn't blind, like Runciman, to how much responsibility for the sack of 1204 lay with the self-centered machinations of Constantinople's elite.
After nearly sixty years both Stacton's and Runciman's accounts of May 1453 are still worth reading, if only because I don't think there has been another history, in English, published since 1965 written in such powerful prose. Clearly historians of the Eastern Empire writing today would offer more nuanced explanations for how the events that led to 1453 are understood and developed. But their work has not rendered either Stacton's or Runciman's book obsolete. For me, and other lovers of the writings of David Stacton (see footnote *3 below) his book is more than a history book. It is part of Stacton's oeuvre of 30 books of poetry, history and novels that he produced between 1954 and death in 1968. David Stacton's fine writing of history throws a light on his historical novels. It is the same acuity of vision and free from the straitjacket of prejudices and assumptions of his time which makes all his 'histories' fiction and non-fiction worth reading.
*1 There is also a review from The New York Times at https://www.nybooks.com/articles/1965... but it is behind a paywall. Also this book was first published under the title 'Crescent and the Cross: The Fall of Byzantium in May 1453' under the authorial pseudonym of David Derekson.
*2 Steven Runciman although a fine historian also exemplified that bizarre image and he is probably one of the very few historians who deserve a biography. Forunately, 'Outlandish Knight: The Byzantine Life of Steven Runciman' by Minoo Dinshaw, is the biography that he deserved.
*3 For the views of Gore Vidal on Stacton see: https://moly.hu/alkotok/david-stacton...
"In 1453, after more than a thousand years as an empire, Byzantium fell to the Turks. Her once vast territories gone, internally torn by religious and political strife, she was queen of the eastern Roman empire in name only. Although the final battle was fought between unequal forces, the one fanatic and professional, the other fearful and poorly armed, it was also a clash between two of history's strongest personalities: Mahomet II and Constantine XI. The triumph was inevitably Mahomet's, and the tragedy was Constantine's, who, betrayed in the palaces of Europe and in the streets of his own city, stood almost alone against the Turks. Constantine's first successes and ultimate failure produce a striking portrait of men and civilisations in conflict.
"David Stacton is the author of a number of highly praised historical novels--among them 'Remember Me', about the mad King Ludwig II, 'Segaki' set in medieval Japan, and 'On a Balcony', a reconstruction of the reigh and personality of the Pharoah Akhnaton. 'The World on the Last Day' is his first non fiction book. In it he exploits to the full his ability to construct a coherent and gripping narrative from the most complicated facts; and to explore with intelligence, sympathy and conviction, situations and personalities which, at first glance, seem very unfamiliar.' From the flyleaf on the jacket of the UK 1965 edition from Faber & Faber.
I read the story of the fall of Constantinople in 1453 for the first time when I was eleven or twelve years old and was captivated by its poetic mythos. The St. Elmos fire shooting up from the dome of Hagia Sophia into the sky as portent of the abandonment of the city by its christian protecting spirits echoed Dionysus abandoning Anthony in Alexandria and while the decision by Constantine XI, the last emperor, when the walls of Constantinople had breached to doff his regalia and go down and die fighting rather then flee brought to mind Priam of Troy dying, sword in hand, with his city. Napoleon on St. Helena or the male descendents of Mohamet II shuffling off into exile in 1924 might well have wondered if they had failed to seize the opportunity to live up to, or step into, legend like Constantine XI did.
'The World on the Last Day' by David Stacton lives up to the poetic grandeur of the event but is also a superb narrative history which displays the author's mastery of the rich contemporary chronicles and survivors accounts. Stacton's came out in the same year as 'The Fall of Constantinople, 1453' by Steven Runciman, the great English historian of Byzantium, and was considered as equally worthy of praise as Runciman's (see: https://www.cambridge.org/core/journa..., and my footnote *1 below).
Stacton charmingly and honestly admits that does not read the Greek, Serbo-Croat, Polish or Russian that most important sources are written and '...even my Latin is on a lapidary level (and) I have had to consult most of them quoted in secondary sources or in translation, or with a crib...' (if only more non-academic historians would be so up-front) yet his account of Constantinople's demise is the equal of Runciman's and in many ways better because Stacton, although immersed in the drama of the events of 1453, is free of Runciman's very obvious pro-Byzantine bias. Such overt bias was, and in many cases still is, the default position of historians of the Eastern Greek Empire (the empire was never called 'Byzantine' in its lifetime. It was Gibbon in the 18th century in his 'Decline and Fall of The Roman Empire' who popularised the term 'Byzantine Empire') because for so long 'Byzantine' studies were viewed as a cul de sac of historical study and its practitioners were regarded as bizarre eccentrics (see footnote *2 Below). For my part I sympathize with Stacton's annoyance with the behavior of the population of Constantinople (almost the only part of the 'empire' still under the 'emperor's' control though often it was vestigial control) who frequently hindered and disrupted Constantine XI efforts to stave off conquest by the Ottomans.
Stacton recognises that there never was a chance of 'saving', only 'postponing', Constantinople's demise and condemns the limited support and help the pope and Latin kingdoms offered, always with strings attached, but rarely delivered. He is as fervent as Runciman in denouncing the role of the Latin 'crusaders' in undermining the Eastern empire, most notably the sack of Constantinople in 1204, but he isn't blind, like Runciman, to how much responsibility for the sack of 1204 lay with the self-centered machinations of Constantinople's elite.
After nearly sixty years both Stacton's and Runciman's accounts of May 1453 are still worth reading, if only because I don't think there has been another history, in English, published since 1965 written in such powerful prose. Clearly historians of the Eastern Empire writing today would offer more nuanced explanations for how the events that led to 1453 are understood and developed. But their work has not rendered either Stacton's or Runciman's book obsolete. For me, and other lovers of the writings of David Stacton (see footnote *3 below) his book is more than a history book. It is part of Stacton's oeuvre of 30 books of poetry, history and novels that he produced between 1954 and death in 1968. David Stacton's fine writing of history throws a light on his historical novels. It is the same acuity of vision and free from the straitjacket of prejudices and assumptions of his time which makes all his 'histories' fiction and non-fiction worth reading.
*1 There is also a review from The New York Times at https://www.nybooks.com/articles/1965... but it is behind a paywall. Also this book was first published under the title 'Crescent and the Cross: The Fall of Byzantium in May 1453' under the authorial pseudonym of David Derekson.
*2 Steven Runciman although a fine historian also exemplified that bizarre image and he is probably one of the very few historians who deserve a biography. Forunately, 'Outlandish Knight: The Byzantine Life of Steven Runciman' by Minoo Dinshaw, is the biography that he deserved.
*3 For the views of Gore Vidal on Stacton see: https://moly.hu/alkotok/david-stacton...
Displaying 1 of 1 review